Amazon.com Widgets

Should celebrities be more protected from the media?

  • They have the right to it, just like any other person

    It is true that politicians and public figure themselves seek to be known to the public. Whether by aiming for high positions or for moments in the spotlight, celebrities of all kinds strive to be stars, to be heard and recognized. However, this doesn’t mean that the intrusion of every detail of their private lives becomes justifiable. Those actors, celebrities and politicians are by the end humans too. They do need their own privacy and they have the right to it, just like any other person.

  • Fight against the paparazzi!

    Just coz they are famous does not mean that their private lives should be out there for everyone to see, especially innocent kids that never asked to be famous. Everyone has a right to privacy and the paparazzi should not be allowed to interfere in their lives. They should be arrested and fined for invading the privacy of others and the magazines who buy the pictures should be sued as well. i mean, sure, take pics at movie premiers and private do's but give these people a chance to live their live in peace. The paparazzi are the ones who provoke actors into being aggressive and i dont blame the actors. If i were famous i probably would have killed one of the paparazzi for their cruelty. why should actors be treated like this when they are talented and want to act for a living? just because they earn more money or because of what? i think it is unfair because the paparazzi are killing the actors and pushing them too far. actors start out as good people and turn to drugs and suicide because of the paparazzi and the magazine who buy the pics and make up stories or trash the actors. Actors are people too and deserve their lives to be normal. i mean, should everyone stop acting there wont be movies for people to enjoy. i love watching movies and seeing how well my favorite actor acts but i feel terrible for the way they are treated because of their jobs. why should they suffer? there should be a law against this treatment!

  • I believe celebrities should be more protected from the media because every individual's lifestyle should remain private so as not to interfere with their professional success.

    The latest sample is the Chris Brown and Rihanna domestic abuse scandal. This seriously affected Chris Brown with the unsuccessful release of his latest album. The media damaged Chris Brown's reputation by bringing to light his most negative actions, resulting in a possible end to his career. Another example is Michael Jackson's child molestation trial. This affected his career by portraying him as a questionable child molester, regardless of the trial outcome, thus affecting his album sales negatively, possibly causing or aiding in his financial troubles. In addition, this can be said to have attributed to his death.

    Posted by: Charlie Ingram
  • Celebs are also common individuals like us, they have right to a personal life

    Just like the art has served propagandistic ends since the days of the egyptian pharaohs, media is being wrongly utilised to propagate untrue and manipulated news. Article 3 of the universal declaration of human rights states: "everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." So do the celebrities. In attempting to maintain a particular image, celebrities may repress rage, fear or sadness caused by negative or excessive media coverage, which may lead to psychological and physical damage.

  • Yes!

    Even though it is apart of being famous privacy is something that everyone should have. No matter if you're famous or infamous you deserve to have as much privacy as possible. It would be weird if you have people coming up to you and asking you questions about your private life it would just be weird.

  • yes they should be protected,they are just doing a job

    What gives the media the right to follow/stalk them everywhere they go. The deserve the right to live their life in privacy just like everyone else does. It's fine to take pictures when on the red carpet etc but at all other times they should be left alone. I think it's disgusting at the best of times but when they use long distance lenses.& take photos of them naked they should be charges. How would you like try going somewhere & having people walking in front of you blinding you taking pictures.& what when they try to leave in their cars,the media.won't move out of the way so they can go. If I followed someone like that I would be charges with stalking & I think it should be the same for the paparazzi.

  • yes

    actually celebrities are same as us, we may not know everything about them, especially their personal live. how can they use their spare time to act like a regular human if there are so many paparazzi who always stalking them wherever they go and whatever they do. We also must understand that they also need a space beside their role as an entertainer

  • yes

    Not everything they do has to be broadcasted. They may live in fear of doing something bad that could be broadcasted everywhere. They might want to be a celebrity but not want everything to be broadcasted, they dont have to stop being a celebrity because they dont want to be spied on by the media.

  • YES!!!!

    Celebrities are just regular humans. They get badly spoken about for things the media catches them doing that we probably do in our everyday lives. Even if they are not the best choices, we all make mistakes, but are not blasted on the internet, radio, and television for it. If they are not purposely doing anything for tv,internet, radio, etc., we should give them their space. We have jobs and do not get bothered at home, so why should they? Raven Symone got punked wile just trying to have a nice, family lunch. We all want times like that. Why can't Raven just have lunch? Everyone needs their privacy.

  • yes, celebrities should be more protected from the media

    The most controversial issue regarding this at the moment seems to be the exposed pictures of the duchess Kate Middleton. She has been so humble about her own appearance and of course is aware of the power of her impression on millions of people. It is outrageous that especially after events that had played out with previous royalty, that she has received such harsh criticism. Stars such as Cyrus, Hilton, Stewart, and so many others who create these images on their own, "hoping the don't get exposed," absolutely deserve the criticism and should not be protected. It is an absolute violation of ones right to privacy when celebrities or anyone for that matter is exposed in circumstances that are considered private... a bloody honeymoon, ones home, place of work. A phone, computer, etc...not grounds for being private.

  • No it their job

    Celebrities shouldn't be more protected from the media beause they want to sell their privacy to you do they can get more attention and views. They want to make their money but they only get their money if tie public would view them. Celebrities know what they have to do so they should not need privacy because they need it.

  • They chose this life.

    Celebrities chose to be publicized. Some even purposely tell paparazzi where they will be going so that they can be photographed there. Also, the paparazzi have a right to the freedom of the press. Of course there should be some limits, but there are already laws in place for that. They cannot break any laws, like entering property without permission. However, they have the right to do whatever it is they want to as long as it abides by the laws that are already in place. Like the celebrities, the paparazzi are people as well and should have the same consequences for breaking laws, but they still have the right to freedom of the press.

  • They need no protection

    They get paid millions to act.
    It's crazy, there are people who bust their behinds trying to make $100.00 a week, doing hard labor. Roofers, builders, etc. it's just crazy that they get paid that kind of money. I think it's so very sad the way normal people get paid.

  • They are people too

    Seriously? Many people go crazy when they get the chance to see their favourite celebrity, but the truth is, they are people too. Just like us. There are people out there who have the same talents but don't get noticed, but no one thinks of them. If these celebrities hadn't been portrayed in the media one way or another, they wouldn't be as famous as they are now.

  • No

    They signed up for the lifestyle. They hired a publicist and an agent to get their name out, they are the ones going to high profile spots that are known for paps take pictures at. The 1st amendment gives us the right to take pictures of public figures, and if they do not want to be photographed, then do not become a celebrity, it is simple as that!

  • You Can't Have It Both Ways.

    Everyone has a right to privacy, but you may have to give up a part of your life when you sign up to do something that puts you in the spotlight of billions of people. People see the money and fame when they decide to seek celebrity status, but they forget that you now have to live in a fish bowl. Paparazzi can be rude and aggressive at times, but you have to take the bitter with the sweet, because they also can get your name in the press. It always seems funny to me that some celebrities seem to be able to avoid paparazzi and media when they want to. Drew Barrymore did an interview where the reporter asked her how she, for the most part, doesn't get into media conflicts these days. She says that she avoids the Chateau Marmount, the Grove and the hottest restaurants and clubs in the LA -- the places that she knows the paparazzi hang out. She just doesn't go around asking for trouble when she knows it can be avoided.

  • They knew what they were doing.

    When they were starting out, they hired agents. They hired publicists to let people know who they were. They signed on for this life, so they shouldn't be allowed that much privacy. I mean, they have a right to keep stuff private that they don't want people to know, but they don't deserve full immunity. Freedom of the press is just as important of a right.

  • Don't bite the hand that feeds...

    Entertainers sign up to give certain amenities away in order to be famous. It's part of the job. Yeah, it might suck to have to be followed at all times but celebs are the closest things Americans have to god figures. You can't be a god figure without constant attention. I don't believe kids of celebs should be followed cause they're just innocent bystanders but adults know the deal. Suck it up, actors. The paps give you attention so you can find work easier. Paps need actors just as much as actors need paps.

  • The media represents the mass and hence, have the right to access the celebrities.

    Celebrities (e.g., politician and glamour icons) cannot reach to the people to a great extent. Media can be a medium through which celebrities can put forward their thoughts and connect with the mass.

    Posted by: dankilberry
  • No

    Maybe there is a moral argument for why they should be but how do you implement something like this and have it be cost effective and practical???


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
hanna0012 says2013-07-07T02:10:11.203
I mean the media goes too far. They take pictures of celebrities when they are bathing in their own backyards. That is just too far.